Satisfying Tomorrow's Alumni Today

Guest Column Jim O'Donnell

Many columns have appeared in The Tech defending viewpoints on
how to improve the undergraduate experience. I have very strong opinions
about this subject. However, there is a critical assumption which must
precede any of what President Charles M. Vest calls "introspective
dialogue." The central question is, why should we try to improve anything?
Do the undergraduates matter?

Speaking as an undergraduate, I feel important. However, anyone will
tell you that they are important. The question is whether the improvement
of the undergraduate experience is vital to the success of the
Institute.

As an institution of higher learning, it is undeniably part of MIT's
mission to create the best educational experience possible. Its faculty and
administration are stewards of the talent in the undergraduate student body
passing through MIT every four years. The curriculum and intellectual
environment cultivate this talent so that it might later blossom into
innovation and discovery, enriching the quality of life of the nation and
the world.

In his column "A Tragedy with a Difference" (Oct. 21), Washington
University Professor Ron Loui says that "too many administrators think
their jobs are about fundraising, investment, and keeping alumni happy."
Yet undergraduates are future alumni. The best way to keep us happy is by
improving our experiences now.

On the Campus Roundtable Web site
(http://web.mit.edu/president/ace/), one fraternity member estimated
that half of fraternities haze their pledges. Regardless of the accuracy of
this statistic, if one of us comes to administration and tells them we have
been hazed, like Scott R. Velazquez G and Robert Plotkin '93, then
administration should do something about it. At the town meeting last
Friday Matthew J. Herper '99 said it scared him how administration was
sidestepping the problems with the fraternities, sororities, and
independent living groups. More people would have attended the meeting,
Herper said, if they felt administration was listening to students. Many of
the students in the audience agreed. We are not stupid; we know whether
problems are being addressed or just talked around.

It is common knowledge that MIT alumni give back less money than alumni
of other universities of similar status. Why is this true? Perhaps the
administration thinks that improving the campus atmosphere is pointless
because we cannot appreciate aesthetics. This is the leveling effect at
work. Because we liked calculus in high school, students cannot appreciate
the simple pleasures normal people appreciate. Perhaps they think we only
need four days to decide where to live because, after all, all we need is a
place we can plug in our computer.

The administration should invest in undergraduates now, or we will not
give money to MIT later. Building dorms and improving campus life is not as
sexy as building a new physics building. That is why we have dorms called
Next House and New House: No one wanted to pay enough to put their name on
the building. Our poor alumni contributions indicate that MIT has neglected
its heart, the undergraduates.

While it may be wise for Vest to pretend that MIT has no unique problems
to the media, he must be careful not to delude himself in the process. The
effects of neglecting issues of undergraduate life are usually opaque to
the outside world until someone dies, of course. However, this neglect
could cost the Institute millions of dollars in alumni contributions in the
future.

I urge the administration to act with courage and in accordance with
correct principles when making the many decisions which lie ahead. Today's
undergraduates will reward you later.